Free Lunch in an Economic Context - Essay Example

Free Lunch in an Economic Context In the economic context, there is no such thing as free lunch. This implies that whenever goods or services are provided, they are paid by someone. It, therefore, leads to the proposition that we cannot obtain things for at zero cost (Sandall, 2008). In economics, this phrase can mean the opportunity that is experienced. This pertains to the way of making choices in daily lives. In addition, it reflects the cost of consumption. The process of making appropriate choices in life requires that there are not instances of tradeoffs and then the assumption that there is no real life offering follows. In cases accountable when no one is portrayed to have borne the risks and costs, the society must be accountable for this burden (Sandall, 2008). When a person takes one for a free lunch out in the restaurant, the other person does not incur any visible cost. However, in economics, the time that this person has spent to take the free offer is worth a penny (Hawking and Anderson, 1988). The phrase originated from the days when there were cases of people providing free lunch to other people. This was especially in the United States of America and some parts of Britain where food was offered at no cost for the beneficiary. It should be noted that this was not an offering to the poor nor to the people who were hungry. This was basically offered to lure the people who liked drinking in the pubs. Any person who managed to buy a drink qualified for that offer (Sandall, 2008). Saloon customers faced the same challenge that relates to the free lunch that is worth discussing. They were initially lured into the business. They paid money that can be analogous to the price of the drinks that were advertised as being free. In the economic context, this can be used as a strategy to increase the marketing of a certain product. The cost incurred in this process is usually hidden because there is indirect payment. In other definition, this can be called an opportunity cost. This mode of marketing can bring about many challenges to those firms carrying it out. Sometimes the cost of the free lunch is higher than the benefits that accrue out of it as a strategy. On the part of the freeloader, it is not always a cost-free offer. This is due to the fact that time must be spent in this activity. In the scope of content marketing, most authors provide links that direct people to certain web pages. The benefit to this person can be expressed in many forms. Some of them have a money value while others are concerned too with the gaining of fame (Hawking and Anderson, 1988). In the context of the daily choices of people, the phrase can be used to explain the consequences that arise out of this offer by some company of business. For example, a person may budget to buy something at a given time. Assuming that this is aimed at to spend money in an economic manner, the end result of free lunch turns out to be extra spending above the stipulated limit. When a person is offered a drink, there are other costs that come about. For instance, the free lunches were much in salt content. This made the consumers resort to purchasing of drinks to help in taking the free lunch (Hawking and Anderson, 1988). Some people usually say that free lunch does not exist. The fireside chat from Washington can reveal that indeed that is true. It further reveals that it is possible to gain something from nothing. In the investment sector, the term is used to explain the nature of the risk associated. The treasury bills, notes, and bonds pose risk-free return. However, the cost incurred in investing in one of the instruments above is the foregone alternative which is even riskier than the former. When an investor advances in his or her level of investment, the phrase gains more sense. Investors tend to provide more capital with the expectation of getting very huge profits than what the securities can lead to. It should be remembered that the securities are less risky to venture in. there is one assumption in this scenario. The growth prospects may not be attained and the investment could be forfeited (McConnell, 1988). On the other hand, the opportunity cost that arises out making the daily choices. If indeed something was purely free, there is no need to count on the costs. This awareness of the related costs helps us to have an intention about the way we spent money and time that we have on a daily basis. New cost accounting enables us to make our decisions bear a lot of fruits and then make us be the best stewards of time and finances. In the online platform, people write interesting content and post as blogs. This is done with smart objectives. First, the author is intended to create awareness of the brand. Secondly, the author aims to show people that he or she is very smart and intelligent. People tend to read fewer books because they are expensive. But when it comes to the reading of the web content, it is an easy task that they can afford with very cheap prices involved (McConnell, 1988). The medium rank trader or business person is very smart. He understands that there exists nothing like free lunch. Therefore he is aware of the place to get a cheap sandwich. When a person tries to minimize the cost of creating a certain content, somebody else who is external is going to incur the cost. For example, it is an option to hire very cheap writers who are not experienced. This type of decision assumes that there is a reduction in costs. However, when hiring an editor to edit the work, a lot of money must be spent (McConnell, 1988). Generally, whenever content is cheap or free to produce, there is a greater chance that it will be garbage. However, there is no certainty in this. It is a matter of probability though. This is regarded as a crucial lesson learned in the field of content economics (McConnell, 1988). In conclusion, whenever something is considered to be less risky in terms of its cost, the rewards are also less. Thinking like an economist has disadvantages in most cases. It is important to weigh the benefits of the actions that we intend to do provided that they are free. There are other important things that can be done instead of engaging in the so-called free things. In addition to this, the economists might have other opportunities that are known to others but their framework blinded them. References Hawking, S. W., & Anderson, J. L. (1988). A Brief History of Time. Physics Today, 41(11), 115-117. doi:10.1063/1.2811637 McConnell, C. R. (1988). The Principles of Economics from Now until Then: A Response. The Journal of Economic Education, 19(2), 148-151. doi:10.1080/00220485.1988.10845252 Sandall, J. (2008). No such thing as a free lunch. Midwifery, 24(2), 123-125. doi:10.1016/j.midw.2008.02.004 Read More